Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative analysis of materials and energy between sustainable roadway rating systems

  • Published:
International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A sustainable roadway rating system (SR2S) consists of a set of indicators to comprehensively measure the sustainability performance of roadway projects. The sustainability level of the systems can be improved by implementing appropriate strategies pertaining to materials and energy. In the peer-reviewed literature, some studies have conducted shallow comparisons of different SR2Ss and no studies have compared the significance of material and energy indicators in existing SR2Ss. To bridge this research gap, five existing SR2Ss were considered. These five SR2Ss described overlapping categories of indicators. Material and energy-related indicators (MEIs) were identified from the representative SR2Ss by conducting content analysis. Similar indicators were regrouped into six different material and energy-related features (MEFs), corresponding to six categories of indicators: local materials; long-life designs; materials obtained using the reduce, reuse, and recycle (3Rs) concept; energy efficiency; earthwork; and hazardous materials. Based on the relative significance index (RSI), the weightings of the selected SR2Ss and the significance of MEIs according to six MEFs were explored. In terms of the aforementioned criteria, the Illinois Livable and Sustainable Transportation gives the greatest weight to material and energy (34.7% of the total points), whereas GreenLITES gives the least weight to material and energy (i.e., 26.8% of total points). Regarding MEFs, SR2Ss focus more on materials obtained by using the 3Rs concept and energy efficiency. This means that indicators pertaining to these two features were considered to contribute significantly to evaluations of roadway sustainability. Aside from 3Rs and energy efficiency, hazardous materials were deemed to be not highly relevant to SR2Ss. Discussion on the indicator requirements related to material and energy are further provided based on different MEFs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. Lee, T. B. Edil, C. H. Benson, J. M. Tmjum, Building Environmentally and Economically Sustainable Transportation Infrastructure: Green Highway Rating System, J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 139 (12) (2013) A4013006 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO. 1943-7862.0000742

    Google Scholar 

  2. Y. Zhang, J. P. Mohsen, A Project-Based Sustainability Rating Tool for Pavement Maintenance, Eng. 4 (2) (2018) 200–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. J. A. Gambatese, S. Rajendran, Sustainable roadway construction: Energy consumption and material waste generation of roadways, Construction Research Congress, San Diego, California, USA, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1061/40754(183)21

    Google Scholar 

  4. F. Li, D. Chen, X. Song, Y. Chen Y, LEDs: a Promising Energy-Saving Light Source for Road Lighting, 2009 Asia-Pacific Power Energy Engineering Conference, Wuhan, China, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1109/APPEEC.2009.4918460

    Google Scholar 

  5. W. Qiao, A. Sharma, J. L. Hudgins, E. G. Jones, Wind/Solar Hybrid Generation-Based Roadway Microgrids, 2011 JEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, Detroit, MI, USA, USA, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2011.6039884

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. L. Peng, D. E. Scorpio, C. J. Kibert, Strategies for successful construction and demolition waste recycling operations, Constr. Manag. Econ. 15 (1) (1997) 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461997373105

    Google Scholar 

  7. S. P. Singh, D. P. Tripathy, P. G. Ranjith, Performance evaluation of cement stabilized fly ash-GBFS mixes as a highway construction material, Waste. Manag. 28 (8) (2008) 1331–1337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.09.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. M. M. Disfani, A. Arulrajah, M. W. Bo, N. Sivakugan, Environmental risks of using recycled crushed glass in road applications, J. Clean. Prod. 20 (1) (2012) 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.07.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. C. Robinette, J. Epps, Energy, emissions, material conservation, and prices associated with construction, rehabilitation, and material alternatives for flexible pavement, Transp. Res. Rec. 2179 (1) (2010) 10–22. https://doi.org/10.3141/2179-02

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. S. H. Yang, J. Y. H. Liu, N. H. Tran, Multi-criteria life cycle approach to develop weighting of sustainability indicators for pavement, Sustain. 10 (7) (2018) 2325. https://doi.org/10.3390/sul0072325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. J. Anderson, S. Muench, J. Holter, J. Lew, C. Weiland, A. Botha, Greenroads Rating System Version 2.0 (Greenroads International, 2015). https://www.greenroads.org. Accessed 20 May 2019

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. Simpson, M. Ozbek, C. Clevenger, R. Atadero, A Framework for Assessing Transportation Sustainability Rating Systems for Implementation in U.S. State Departments of Transportation. Report number MPC-14-268. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. Clevenger, M. Ozbek, S. Simpson, Review of sustainability rating systems used for infrastructure projects, 49th ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Curz, J. L. Kim, H. S. Cha, Using a thematic framework to compare sustainability rating, Construction Research Congress 2012: Construction Challenges in a Flat World, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. M. Diaz-Sarachaga, D. Jato-Espino, B. Alsulami, D. Castro-Fresno, Evaluation of existing sustainable infrastructure rating systems for their application in developing countries, Ecol. Indie. 71 (2016) 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmd.2016.07.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. J. W. Park, Y. H. Ahn, Development of a green road rating system for South Korea, Int. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban. Dev. 6 (4) (2015) 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/2093761X.2015.1117404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. S. I. Sarsam, Sustainable and Green Roadway Rating System, Int. J. Sci. Res. Environ. Sci. 3 (3) (2015) 99–106. https://doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2015-p0099-0106

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Bryce, S. Brodie, T. Parry, D. L. Presti, A systematic assessment of road pavement sustainability through a review of rating tools, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 120 (2017) 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. L. Y. Shen, O. J. Jorge, M. N. Shah, X. Zhang, The application of urban sustainability indicators - A comparison between various practices, Habitat. Int. 35 (1) (2011) 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2010.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. P. C. Bueno, J. M. Vassallo, K. Cheung, Sustainability Assessment of Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Review of Existing Tools and Methods, Transp. Rev. 35 (5) (2015) 622–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1041435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. J. Lee, T. Edil, C. Benson, J. Tinjum, Evaluation of variable affecting sustainable highway design using the BEST2ST-in-Highways system, Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board. 2233 (1) (2011) 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1061/41148(389)39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. H. Naganathan, W. K. Chong, Evaluation of state sustainable transportation performances (SSTP) using sustainable indicators, Sustain. Cities. Soc. 35 (2017) 799–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. E. Barrella, K. Lineburg, P. Hurley, Applying a transportation rating system to advance sustainability evaluation, planning, and partnerships, Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-05-2015-0087

    Google Scholar 

  24. Z. Wu, L. Shen, A. Yu, X. Zhang, A comparative analysis of waste management requirements between five green building rating systems for new residential buildings, J. Clean. Prod. 112 (2016) 895–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. M. Clark, C. Paulli, Z. Tetreault, J. Thomas, Green Guide for Roads Rating System, (Master Thesis), Worcester Polytechnical Institute, Worcester, MA, USA, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  26. New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). (GreenLITES Project Design Certification Program, 2010), https://www.dot.ny.gov/programs/greenlites/repository/Gre en LITES Certification Program Document - April 2010.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2019

  27. K. Douglas, F. John, D. Abdul, W. Rick, A. Mchelle, H. Dave, C. W. Tanyu, (Illinois Livable and Sustainable Transportation Rating System and Guide (I-LAST), 2012), https://idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/Transportation-System/Reports/Desenv/Enviromental/I-LAST%20V%202%2002.pdf. Accessed 05 June 2019

    Google Scholar 

  28. L. Reid, T. Bevan, A. Davis, T. Neuman, K. Penney, S. Seskin, J. Schulz, Infrastructure Voluntary Evaluation Sustainability Tool (INVEST)_Version 1.2. (Sustainablehighway, 2015), https://www.sustainablehighway.org. Accessed 10 June 2019

    Google Scholar 

  29. L. Reid, T. Bevan, A. Davis, T. Neuman, K. Penney, S. Seskin, J. Schulz, Infrastructure Voluntary Evaluation Sustainability Tool (INVEST)_Version 1.2_Cntena Modifications Matrix, (Sustainablehighway, 2018, https://www.sustainablehighways.org/files/3316.pdf. Accessed 06 October 2019

    Google Scholar 

  30. H. F. Hsieh, S. E. Shannon, Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qual. Health. Res. 15 (9) (2005) 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. X. Huo, A. T. W. Yu, Z. Wu, A comparative analysis of site planning and design among green building rating tools, J. Clean. Prod. 147 (2017) 352–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. N.H. Tran, S.H. Yang, T. Huang, Comparative analysis of traffic-and-transportation-planning-related indicators in sustainable transportation infrastructure rating systems, Int. J. Sustain. Transp. (2020) https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1722868

    Google Scholar 

  33. H. Yuan, L. Shen, Trend of the research on construction and demolition waste management, Waste, Manag. 31 (4) (2011) 670–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.10.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. P. R. Fleming, M. W. Frost, J. P. Lambert, Sustainable Earthworks Specifications for Transport Infrastructure, Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board. 1975 (1) (2006) 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198106197500108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. A. Capony, B. Muresan, M. Dauvergne, J. C. Auriol, V. Ferber, A. Jullien, Monitoring and environmental modeling of earthwork impacts: A road construction case study, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 74 (2013) 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1 University Rd, Tainan City, 70101, Taiwan

    Nam Hoai Tran & Shih-Hsien Yang

Authors
  1. Nam Hoai Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shih-Hsien Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shih-Hsien Yang.

Additional information

Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tran, N.H., Yang, SH. Comparative analysis of materials and energy between sustainable roadway rating systems. Int. J. Pavement Res. Technol. 14, 1–12 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-020-0032-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-020-0032-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation